articleJAMAJan 26, 2010Closed access

Comparison of Antiarrhythmic Drug Therapy and Radiofrequency Catheter Ablation in Patients With Paroxysmal Atrial Fibrillation

Loyola University Medical Center · Loyola University Chicago · +15 more institutions

PubMed
Indexed incrossrefpubmed

Abstract

Objective

To determine the efficacy of catheter ablation compared with antiarrhythmic drug therapy (ADT) in treating symptomatic paroxysmal AF. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS: A prospective, multicenter, randomized (2:1), unblinded, Bayesian-designed study conducted at 19 hospitals of 167 patients who did not respond to at least 1 antiarrhythmic drug and who experienced at least 3 AF episodes within 6 months before randomization. Enrollment occurred between October 25, 2004, and October 11, 2007, with the last follow-up on January 19, 2009. INTERVENTION: Catheter ablation (n = 106) or ADT (n = 61), with assessment for effectiveness in a comparable 9-month follow-up period. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Time to protocol-defined treatment failure. The proportion of patients who experienced major treatment-related adverse events within 30 days of catheter ablation or ADT was also reported.

Results

At the end of the 9-month effectiveness evaluation period, 66% of patients in the catheter ablation group remained free from protocol-defined treatment failure compared with 16% of patients treated with ADT. The hazard ratio of catheter ablation to ADT was 0.30 (95% confidence interval, 0.19-0.47; P

Citation impact

1,165
total citations
FWCI
63.80
Percentile
100%
References
28
Citations per year

Authors

18

Topics & keywords

Keywords
  • Medicine
  • Atrial fibrillation
  • Catheter ablation
  • Ablation
  • Adverse effect
  • Randomization
  • Catheter
  • Hazard ratio
No related works found for this paper.